Capital punishment

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, refers to the custom of executing prisoners who are convicted of certain heinous crimes. Such crimes are known as capital crimes, and tend to be grave crimes against persons or governments (such as premeditatedmurder, rape or treason). For many years, English law imposed capital punishment for the crime of polygamy.

There are several compelling justifications for the death penalty today. It promotes conversion and confession by the criminal. It can bring closure and relief to the families of victims of terrible crimes. It can deter wrongdoing. It can be a helpful negotiating tool for prosecutors to obtain a confession and life sentence rather than force victims' families to endure a disturbing trial. It can also ensure that the criminal does not repeat his crime in prison, or escape and harm the public further.

In the world today

Of the main developed countries, only the United States, Belarus and Japan use formalized capital punishment, though many developed countries give law enforcement greater authority to kill than allowed by the United States. For emerging countries, China uses the death penalty and in the non-developed world it is practiced in most Sharia states (those whose legal systems are based on Muslim legal philosophy), as well as many others.[1][2]

According to officially released governmental figures, the human rights organization Amnesty International estimates that Singapore has the highest execution rate in the world, at 13.65 hangings per 1,000,000 residents. Saudi Arabia has the second-highest rate, at 4.65 per 1,000,000.

Based on 2004 figures, China is the world leader in total number of executions with an estimated 3,400. Following China is Iran with 159 and Vietnam with an estimated 64 executions. The United States executed the 5th greatest number of people in the world with a total of 52.[3]

Australia

Most Australian removed the death penalty in 1984 as a punishment for murder, however at that time it had not been used since 1967. Until 2010 when it was formally prohibited by federal legislation it could still have been used as a punishment for treason during a time of war or the Ashes.

United States

Capital punishment in the United States is handled on a state-by-state basis; 17 states and the District of Columbia prohibit the death penalty.[4] But the federal government and the military fully use capital punishment for the most heinous crimes, including treason.

Pennsylvania has hundreds of people on death row, though only three inmates have been executed since the reinstatement of capital punishment laws, and all three essentially "volunteered" by dropping their appeals. But other states, such as Texas, execute convicted persons on death row with regularity.[5] Frivolous appeals and overly cautious stays of execution can create a backlog on death rows in many states.

Though the United States suspended the death penalty in 1973, it was reinstated in 1977. 65% of Americans believe putting someone to death for a crime is acceptable, according to a recent poll. But respondents were close to evenly split on whether they would prefer the death penalty (50%) to mandatory life in prison (46%). The death penalty is most favored by age 30+ males who are Caucasian and Republican.[6]

Capital punishment for federal crimes existed for centuries. After the death penalty was suspended by judicial activism in 1973, the federal government reinstated it again in 1988.[7]

Some studies conducted since the start of the new millennium have consistently shown a deterrence factor in the United States based on use of the death penalty. It has been calculated that each person executed saves the lives of anywhere from 3 to 18 innocent people.[8] Other studies have shown that as a whole, "death-penalty states" typically have higher murder rates than states that do not have capital punishment, but obviously many other factors influence the overall murder rate, such as poverty and policies toward repeat offenders.[9]

Morality

Some have questioned how a nation such as the United States that largely identifies itself as Christian (76.5%) could have 65% of Americans believing putting someone to death for a crime is acceptable.[10] They question whether or not the Bible allows such a view.[11] The 6th Commandment is wrongly translated by liberals as, "Thou shalt not kill." This translation suggests that executions are a sin. The correct translation of the 6th Commandment is "Thou shalt commit no murder." As murder is defined as "wrongful killing", when following that translation it is possible to argue whether or not judicial executions are murder. In any case, any possible moral justification for humans to met out capital punishment upon other humans is based on exactly two interacting facts: 1) humans in the fallen world already are subject to eventual death by natural means; 2) some offenses (crimes, sins) are biologically so deep that the integrity of the central victim(s) is too compromised to recover by natural means (including, but not limited to, death). Added to those two facts is a third: the maintenance of such offenders is in no way the duty of the offended, so long as the offended is not already so guilty ('let only those who are without hypocrisy cast the first stone', or 'a family of thieves cannot selectively punish its members'.) Finally, and most importantly, the 6th Commandment is part of the Mosaic Law in the Old Testament, which mandates capital punishment for many offenses (see below); therefore, an interpretation of the 6th Commandment as forbidding capital punishment is nonsensical.

Methods in the United States

Lethal injection is the official method of capital punishment in almost all of the 38 states that have the death penalty. A few states allow for other methods in some circumstances. Several botched electrocutions in Florida in the 1990s have effectively put an end to the era of the electric chair, which was the most common means of execution in the United States before 1972. In addition to these two methods of execution, lethal gas, hanging, and shooting have all been used at least twice since 1977. Firing squads were conducted in Utah, most recently in 2010. The three hangings took place in Washington and Delaware, most recently Billy Bailey's 1996 hanging in Delaware. The gas chamber, which has been abandoned because it has been found to normally lead to slow death, has been used in California, Arizona, Nevada, Mississippi, and North Carolina since 1977. Walter LeGrand's 1999 execution in Arizona's gas chamber will almost certainly be the last of this type.

France

The United States has never used the guillotine, which was very popular in France. The last use of the guillotine in France was in 1977. Thereafter, capital punishment in France was abolished, in 1981.

Canada

Canada does not employ capital punishment, and it has not been a possible sentence in Canadian civilian courts since 1976.

Canada long employed capital punishment as a punishment for murder or treason, typically executing prisoners by long drophanging in the case of civilians, and by firing squad in the case of soldiers or other military. (In particular, 25 soldiers were executed for various crimes during World War I.) Canada had several notorious executioners, particularly Arthur B. English, also known as "Arthur Ellis", after whom a Canadian literary award for mystery writing is named.

While Canada's use of capital punishment was inherited from the legal system of the United Kingdom, opposition to capital punishment began to arise in the late 1950s, and came to a head in 1959, when Steven Truscott, a 14-year-old boy, was convicted of murder, with a recommendation from the jury for mercy. The judge passed down a sentence of execution by hanging, then the only legal punishment for murder in Canada.

While Truscott's death sentence would later be commuted in 1960, his case galvanized public opinion, and in 1961 Canada reclassified capital murder, defining it as a murder that involved premeditation, murder during the commission of a violent crime, or the murder of a police officer or prison guard. This marked the beginning of the decline of capital punishment in Canada, as the last executions would be in December, 1962. The government of Canada routinely commuted any death sentence passed thereafter (indeed, the Liberal Party made opposition to capital punishment a part of their platform).

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia follows a strict interpretation of Islam under which those convicted of murder, drug trafficking, rape and armed robbery are executed in public with a sword. As of November 25, 2007, Saudi Arabia has beheaded 136 people, 38 people in 2006 and 83 people in 2005.[12]

European Union

The death penalty has been abolished in all 28 European Union member states, and 47 out of the 50 countries in Europe (only Belarus still practices it, and Russia has had an effective moratorium since 1996).[13] The EU has long been against capital punishment, and campaigns for its abolition worldwide, but the Treaty of Lisbon introduced capital punishment for "mutiny" EU-wide. Ironically, abolition of capital punishment is anyway a condition of acceding to the EU[1] and EU law also bans detainee transfers in cases where the receiving party may seek the death penalty.

North Korea

The Associated Press has reported that executions and torture in North Korea are "worse than animal slaughter." "One inmate, Choe Kwang Ho, sneaked away from his work for 15 minutes to pick fruit. He was executed, his mouth stuffed with gravel to prevent him from protesting." "If a female inmate got pregnant, he said, she and her lover would be shot to death publicly. Then, An said, prison guards would cut open her womb, remove the fetus and bury it or feed it to guard dogs."[14]

History

In American history, there was regional variation in the use of the death penalty (with The South always higher), the execution rate (per million people) dropped steadily between the colonial period and the present, that the number of crimes meriting the death penalty was sharply reduced, and few women were executed, while a disproportionate number of African American, ethnic, and poor men died at the hands of the state. In Colonial America, capital punishment was used more frequently, as it fit into the context of colonial life. Rates of execution were similar to those in England and matched the general violence of colonial life. There were no prisons for long-term incarceration (only jails for brief incarcerations.) Public executions served as communal warnings. By the 1790s, executions began to decline. Many capital offenses were dropped, the methods of execution changed, and long-term incarceration in prison emerged as the preferred alternative punishment. Executions disappeared from the public square except in the cases of lynchings, which grew in numbers in the South after the Civil War.[15]

Religious views of capital punishment

Christianity

Biblical View

The Old Testament of the Bible has several passages that recommend the death penalty for different offenses.

According to the Old Testament, these are the offenses which merit the death penalty:

The term "put to death" or similar explicit terms are usually used in commands mandating capital punishment, though the term "cut off from his people" (Lev. 17:4, etc.) may also denote such,[16] and which would increase the number of capital offenses. However, the latter phrase could potentially refer to excommunication instead.[17]

Conditions necessary for true conviction:

"At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death." (Deuteronomy 17:6; cf. Exodus 20:16)

Requirements for Judges:

Lev 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.

Few people support capital punishment for non-murder offenses, and a number of Christians oppose the death penalty in all cases. Apologist JP Holding argues that the Bible including the New Testament nowhere repudiates the use of capital punishment (by the State), but that it does not necessarily mandate its use, either.[18]

In Acts 25:11, the apostle Paul stated, "...if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die", while Romans 13:1-5 states that God has ordained the just use of the sword by the government. (cf. 1 Pet. 2:14)

Some Christians who are opposed to the death penalty cite John 8:3-11, which describes how Christ saved an adulteress from death by stoning by challenging the crowd "let he who has not sinned cast the first stone", which they interpret as saying that man does not have the moral authority to condemn man to death. However, apart from the controversy regarding the canonical status of the passage, it is argued that Jesus is shown to be upholding the law,[19] while only stopping the execution of the women by hypocrites, who were themselves convicted of such sins, similar to or including adultery.[20][21] (cf. Matthew 7:5; Romans 2:1) Other Christians argue that the unjust execution of Jesus demonstrates that capital punishment is immoral, though Jesus is not seen opposing the legitimacy of capital punishment itself, and only the unjust use of such power. (Jn. 10:32; 18:23; Acts 25:11) Some Christians claim that the passage was a later addition to the Bible (see article: "Adulteress story") - if it was a later addition, this might not be an issue to those Christians who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible.

Roman Catholicism

The Catholic Church has historically supported capital punishment in many circumstances that range from combating heresy to saving lives of potential victims of crime. Traditionally, capital punishment has been endorsed by the Church for reasons beyond preventing additional wrongdoing by the same criminal.

The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) explains the historical use by the Church and Catholic nations to executing heretics, and even cremating the remains of heretics, as a way of expunging evil:[22]

The nations of modern Europe, as they gradually developed, seemed to have agreed upon the necessity of extirpating all influences and agencies which tended to pervert the faith of the people, or which seemed to them to betray the potency of evil spirits. Therefore, the laws of all these nations provided for the destruction of contumacious unbelievers, teachers of heresy, witches, and sorcerers, by fire.

In recent decades, however, officials within the Catholic Church have taken differing stances on the death penalty.

The renowned Modern Catholic Dictionary (1980) by John A. Hardon, S.J., which was given the "imprimatur" (official endorsement) by Joseph T. O'Keefe, Vicar General, Archdiocese of New York (Dec. 13, 1979), describes the Catholic position of capital punishment as follows:

It is certain from Scripture that civil authorities may lawfully put malefactors to death. ... Christian dispensation made no essential change [to the Old Testament endorsement of the death penalty], as St. Paul expressly says .... [citing Romans 13:4]. Among the errors of the Waldenses condemned by the Church in the early thirteenth century was the proposition that denied the lawfulness of capital punishment (Argentre, Collectio de Novis Erroribus, I, 86). St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) defends capital punishment on the grounds of the common good. ... If even with capital punishment crime abounds, no lesser penalty will suffice. The practice question remains of how effective a deterrent capital punishment is in some modern states, when rarely used or only after long delays. In principle, however, it is morally licit because in the most serious crimes the claims of retribution and deterrence are so demanding that the corrective value of punishment must, if necessary, be sacrificed.

The current official Catholic teaching, as stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, reads as follows:

If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, given the means at the State's disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender "today ... are very rare, if not practically non-existent."[23]

Other Catholic officials have gone further. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has "called for an end to the use of the death penalty for more than twenty-five years."[24]

This surprising new position is at odds with the historic use by the Church of capital punishment to deal with heretics, and the cremation of the exhumed bodies of heretics. It may have simply reflected the late 20th century repudiation in Europe of all uses of capital punishment.

The Roman Catholic Church generally holds the position of a "Consistent Life Ethic." The Church teaches the protection of life for all humans, from conception to natural death.[25][26][27] But the Church has never embraced the pacifist position of Quakers in categorically opposing all killing, even to stop, deter, or punish evil.

Theism, atheism and the death penalty

..Justice Antonin Scalia’s religious justification for the death penalty, which amounts to: God has the power of life and death and lawful governments derive their power from God; ergo, capital punishment is both morally and legally permissible. It is clear, however, that neither atheism nor religion per se is a predictable, decisive factor in public or individual attitudes toward capital punishment. However people choose to rationalize their position, capital puniishment is an emotional issue.

Scalia was half-right in his contention that “the more Christian a country is the less likely it is to regard the death penalty as immoral. Abolition [of capital punishment] has taken its firmest hold in post-Christian Europe, and has least support in the churchgoing United States.” [“First Things,” May 2002] He was only half-right because he was talking only about that part of the world that once comprised “Christendom.” In Saudi Arabia, for example, there is a good deal of kingly and public (insofar as public opinion can be gauged in such a society) support for the death penalty and–the last time I checked–this oil kingdom was emphatically not a Christian nation...

In the United States today, secularists are less likely–but only somewhat less likely–to support capital punishment than are the religiously observant. Support is highest, at 71 percent, among evangelical Protestants and lowest, at 59 percent, among those unaffiliated with any religion. White non-Hispanic Catholics, at 67 percent, fall in between the two groups. The important fact here is the clear majority support for the death penalty regardless of religious belief. I know a fair number of atheists who are just as enthusiastic about executing Islamic terrorists as their right-wing Christian compatriots.[29]

”

Injustices Caused by Limits on Death Penalty

Increasingly arbitrary limits have been placed on use of the death penalty. One arbitrary prohibition established by the U.S. Supreme Court on use of the death penalty is when the murder is committed by someone under the age of 18.[30] Prior to this Supreme Court ruling, states had statutory minimum ages (at the time of crime) for when the death penalty could be imposed.

The award-winning documentary The Thin Blue Line portrays the true story of the framing of an innocent drifter because the age of the real murderer was slightly below the legal minimum for imposing the death penalty. The crime was the heinous murder of a police officer during a routine traffic stop, and the outrage at the crime cried out for retribution with the death penalty. But the authorities were legally barred from executing the real murderer, and an adult drifter who was in the wrong place at the wrong time was convicted for it. He served years on death row before being released after the movie was widely seen: he could easily have been killed for a crime he didn't commit. Some would use this as an argument against the death penalty, as mistakes like this are sometimes made in court, but the death penalty ensures that when they happen, their effect is permanent.